respect vs. tolerance

Coincidentally enough, these two words have popped up in two separate conversations in the last couple of weeks. And I’ve been thinking… which one is best? Which one applies to me? How do I feel about being on the receiving end of one versus the other?

First, let me recount the instances.

Example #1 was overheard at a large, well-known church in my area. Here it is:

Question: So do you respect other belief systems?Reply: No, we tolerate them.

Example #2 was posted on a private message board last week, a board that only includes kids I grew up with in TheChurch. And here it is:

The tone I wish to convey is one of respect, not necessarily tolerance. I will not pretend that everyone has made the best choices, but I do recognize that each one of you has your own story, your own struggles and your need to be respected as a human being.

Interesting, isn’t it, that this verbal dichotomy was presented from two opposing (completely unrelated) perspectives just in the course of the last two weeks.

Now I must be honest. My initial reaction to both of these statements was identical… that is, I found them equally offensive. The actual words used were opposite — one claimed “tolerance, not respect” while the other claimed “respect, not tolerance.” However, the tone & implication feels the same to me. A lack of acceptance with a dash of judgment seems to be present in both statements.

So my inner almost-English major felt compelled to study the actual meanings of these words:

re·spect–verb To hold in esteem or honor; to show regard or consideration for; to refrain from intruding upon or interfering with

tol·er·ate–verb To allow the existence, presence, practice, or act of without prohibition or hindrance; permit; to endure without repugnance; put up with

I’m reading these definitions, and I’m thinking that “respect” appears to be the clear choice. I would rather my views and beliefs be respected by others, rather than tolerated. You can have tolerance without respect (as is evidenced in Example #1)… but can you have respect without tolerance (Example #2)? I suppose that the writer of Ex. #2 could “refrain from interfering with” the choices that others have made, but not without repugnance.

It’s disturbing to me, I guess. I want to respect others. I want to be tolerant of others. But I don’t want to patronize or have an attitude of “permission” toward others. What right do I have to give others permission to believe as they wish? None at all. I want to be able to recognize differences without adopting an “us versus them” mentality. I grew up in an environment that was ruled by this mentality, and it’s incredibly polarizing, lonely, & even frightening to realize as a child that your friends & classmates are the “them” that you hear about at church.

This entire thought feels very incomplete. I’m just rambling. Not sure I’ve made a point, or if I even had one in the first place…

Well that definition of tolerance is what “religious tolerance” means. Anybody who is serious about his or her belief system has made a choice and decided against some other system. In some cases the objections can be greater than others, but as long as they’re not barring the door to your house of worship, they’re tolerating your belief.

I think its possible to respect the seriousness with which someone has approached a decision (and to tolerate the decision) without agreeing that the decision was the best one.

It might also be possible to respect a decision without tolerating it. Say for instance, that I could respect a woman’s decision to wear a veil that covers her face. In that she would have to remove the veil for an ID photo, I as a member of society wouldn’t be tolerating her practice, while not necessarily disrespecting it.

I think you can do either one (and not both) and still have a choice about being charitable or nasty about it.

Not sure which one to use sometimes, I’ll be honest. One sounds, like you said, permissive, while the other often sounds more like, “Oh, I’ll just put up w/ it and judge it silently.” I don’t necessarily want to be either. Some things are fairly clear, like I would not respect nor tolerate drug use in my house/marriage, etc. I would respect, rather than just tolerate, the worship ceremony of a Buddhist were I to ever be privy to that sort of thing. I think most people- and I include faiths in this too- are also confused. Perhaps people believe that “respect” and “agree” are synonymous, when in fact you are simply being considerate and, to a degree, polite.

First time visitor…absolutely loved the way you have framed your profile, directing the sarcasm at yourself, even at your saddest stages. I am sure the ability to look truthfully and directly at these situations for what they are, and their impact on you – helps a lot…even in your quest for answers to deep questions. Since there are no no “filtering layers” in between. Surely following your blog from now….

A deep question might evoke a long response. I hope you do not mind. :-) I would start from the dictionary meanings themselves. “To hold in esteem or in honor” is quite different from “refrain from intruding on or interfering with”. In fact the latter seems closer to the meaning of ‘tolerance’ : “To allow the existence…”. So for the purpose of this discussion, I would rather stick to the meanings that show the difference: “To hold in high honor” and “To allow existence”

Let us start with respect. I can respect a PERSON (eg. for doing something much better than I can). But it starts with an implicit belief that he is better in something that I MYSELF believe is “good”(Doing 500 pushups vs stealing). So I think, that respect demands alignment of belief and a judgment(positive) as the precursor. So we start by respecting OUR own beliefs. Thats where the flavour of permissiveness or condascension probably creeps in. But judgments by their nature apply only on ‘beliefs’ – not on FACTS, or the truth. I might not be offended if you disagree with me on “Milk is white”. But I might take offence if you disagree on “Your god does not exist” :-) Judgments are applicable only in situations of ignorance. The very fact that we have to make a judgment, the very possibility of taking offence – shows the existence of ignorance(even if we cannot identify its exact nature). In the absence of ignorance, there is “Acceptance”. Not agreement, not condascension, not judgment – simply a recognition of the truth..including that of our ignorance.

Now about tolerance: I “allow” someone to exist. There’s the judgment!! Who am I to allow or not allow??? They/it just EXISTS. My positive judgment – and hence respect wont change that. My negative judgment – and hence tolerance wont change that either. But yes, the existence of the judgement is in ME. And THAT will impact me in some way.

So maybe respect and tolerance are both the same – exactly like you said. Both reek of judgement. Positive or negative. Subtle or gross. The antonym that might be needed in such situations might be ‘Acceptance’. Which excludes the need for ANY judgment. Not as a facour – but as a truth. Knowing fully well that had it been about a fact – agreement is not needed. And if it is about belief – our understanding is limited by our ignorance. Disagreement has no consequence!

I'm a 33-yr-old southern girl with a bit of a sarcasm problem. Was raised in a scary church and am still working through my God/religion/father issues.

In 2006, my mother was rediagnosed with breast cancer. In 2007, she died. Then came the ensuing aftermath, therapy, and figuring out how the hell to live a life that bore no resemblance to my own. And because things weren't fun enough, infertility arrived on the scene in 2008 in the form of two pregnancy losses. (2009 update: Make that three pregnancy losses.) Good times, I tell ya.

On Jan 2, 2011, I found myself knocked up once again. Am now striving on a daily basis to make sure that this one doesn't go the way of its predecessors.

It's been a bit of a train wreck, but things are on the upswing. Yep, that's what I'm telling myself...